Another white supremacist right-wing terrorist commits mass murder. I’m sure you’ve heard all about it. I’m not going to talk much about gun control because you already know where you stand on that issue. I’m not going to even talk about the actual massacre because you’ve probably heard all about it and, honestly, I doubt I have anything new to say. I do want to talk about the fact that I wish I was more shocked. I mean, do you actually remember a time when it would be shocking to hear about any kind of massacre? I certainly do, and I honestly feel like it was decades ago. Now, I just wait for it to happen, knowing it will.  

Remember back in 2011 when a white supremacist right-wing terrorist massacred 79 people in Norway? I hope you do, because I actually forgot all about it. I seriously did. This morning I read Huffpost’s really excellent: Mass Shooters Have Exploited the Internet For Years. New Zealand Took It To A New Level. (No, seriously, it’s great, you should take a few minutes to read it because they accurately point out some of the social problems that lead to mass shootings). Somewhere within the Huffpost story, the writers mention the 2011 attack in Norway that killed seven nine people, and I immediately thought, “Attack on Norway? Jesus, I don’t even remember that one.” I had to look it up. It took me a few moments of reading to recall the details. And then I thought, “Oh, I think there's a Netflix movie about it that just came out a few months ago - maybe I should watch it.” Sadly, my thoughts were not “What a horrible, f**king thing to have happened!” Nope. My thoughts were, “Don’t remember it. Oh, right, now I remember it. I should watch the movie.” =(

I mean, there are plenty of mass shootings I do remember. Without looking anything up: Vegas. The Ariana Grande concert in the UK (I think this was a bomb and not a shooting, or maybe it was both, or maybe I’m mixing up concert attacks). The FL nightclub massacre. Columbine. Virginia Tech. Sandy Hook. The Synagogue attack in … um, I can’t recall which city (and I even wrote about that attack). The attack on the movie theater where viewers were watching Batman, but I don’t remember the name of the theater chain or the city it happened. Multiple attacks on black folks while they’re in church. Multiple attacks in Paris within the last five years. The Kenya school attack. The Australian massacre in Port Arthur and I only remember this one because of the Jim Jefferies stand up routine about the attack and his views on gun control (which, is a pretty good routine). The Amish school shooting in … actually, I don’t remember where. Those are the ones I remember off the top of my head and there are clearly important details that I just can't recall - like the horrible massacre in Norway where 79 people died! Five years from now, after another couple dozen mass shootings have occurred, I wonder which of the above I will have forgotten?

Obviously the point being that mass shootings happen often enough that I no longer even remember some of them. I don’t claim to have a solution; however, I do see a few things in common with modern day massacres.

  • They’re very often by right-wing extremists and/or religious fanatics.
  • They’re overwhelmingly by men. Like, 99.9% of the time the mass shooter is male - a cripplingly insecure male.
  • They are usually white. Not always, but usually. 
  • They often leave behind a "manifesto" where they blame their crippling insecurities on Jews, or people of color, or women, or liberals - or all the above.  
  • They all use semi-automatic guns, and often use modified semi-automatic rifles.  

And there we have our game of Clue: The modern day massacre edition! Pick a mass shooting and ask -  who did it? Oh, I know! I know! Is it ”the crippling insecure white male right-wing extremist, in the city, with a semi-automatic weapon?”  (Well, not 100% of the time but, close enough).

Hey, how about this for a new law - men are banned from owning and operating guns! No, that's illegal. Let's remember the Second Amendment here so, oh, I know! Men can own, like, a flintlock rifle or a blunderbuss, or something as equally inefficient in the modern world - but women are allowed to own Uzi's and 9mm semi-automatic pistols! That would probably cut down on mass shootings. =)

Anyway. We all know mass shootings are not going away. Maybe the next time a cripplingly insecure man decides to shoot up a movie theater - I’ll be there and get killed. Or maybe the next time a cripplingly insecure man decides to “ignite a race war” by walking into a church filled with black folks and gunning them down - you’ll be there and get killed. Or maybe the next time a cripplingly insecure man decides to walk into a nightclub and gun down dancers - your kid will be there and get killed.

But I hope not. I hope someone, somewhere has a solution. And I hope it comes sooner, rather than later. Until then, I will cynically just wait for the next mass shooting to happen. I’ll probably post a bitter story about that one too - "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." 

Published in Opinion

While the government is busy attempting to disarm the Americans that they work for through their continuous propaganda efforts, they are on the back end in covertly expanding their agencies' arsenals. This should come as no surprise.  These types of actions have been leveled against the American people since September 11, 2001, in which many agencies were created that were sold to the American people as precautionary and security measures, only to find that 18 years later that these same agencies have been found warring and stripping away the rights of Americans that government is to secure (Deuteronomy 29:63).

If this is not a cause of alarm to the American people, then what is?

Mint Press News' Whitney Webb reported in an article titled, “Non-Military Federal Agencies Under Trump Expand Already Enormous Arsenals”:

The massive purchases of ammo and weapons by non-military federal agencies, like the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Social Security Administration (SSA), that first began under the Obama administration has continued unabated under the Trump administration, while receiving less media coverage.

According to a report released last December by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and recently highlighted by Forbes, the mass purchase of ammunition, weapons and other military-grade items by ostensibly civilian government agencies has continued up through Fiscal Year (FY) 2017, the latest year for which data is available. The report also found that many agencies had misreported the amount and size of their ammo and weapons purchases to the GAO by a significant degree. In one case, the GAO found that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had actually spent eight times more on weapons and ammo than it had disclosed to their office.

The budgets that had been proposed for FY 2017 — which ended on September 30, 2017 — had originally been drafted under the Obama administration but were amended by the Trump administration and the then-Republican-led Congress beginning in late January 2017 following President Donald Trump’s inauguration. The Trump administration chose to leave the massive purchases of ammo and weapons by non-military agencies as they were, despite the controversy they had caused among many Trump supporters and other groups when such purchases were made under the Obama administration.

Among the agencies that acquired ammunition, weapons and related equipment in FY 2017 were:

  • The IRS spent $600,000 on ammunition but refused to disclose to the GAO its intended purpose and told the GAO that it could not provide data on firearms purchases. The IRS has stated in the past that such purchases are used in “investigating potential criminal violations of the Internal Revenue Code.” Its current inventory is estimated to include 4,461 firearms, including submachine guns, and over 5 million rounds of ammunition.
  • The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) of the Department of Veterans Affairs purchased around 600 firearms and nearly 20,000 rounds of ammunition, along with riot gear and camouflage uniforms. The VHA has claimed that these purchases are for “enforcing federal law at VA medical facilities (and some National Cemetery and Benefits locations).”
  • The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the Social Security Administration (SSA) purchased around 300 firearms and 250,000 rounds of ammunition. The SSA’s OIG has stated that it uses these items for investigations into “wrongdoing by applicants, beneficiaries, contractors and third parties, and employees.
  • The National Park Service (NPS) of the U.S. Department of the Interior purchased nearly 2 million rounds, approximately 1,500 firearms, silencers, riot shields and batons, camouflage uniforms and “pyrotechnics and specialized munitions.” The stated purpose of these items is to protect “the safety and health of NPS visitors, partners, and staff, as well as our natural and cultural resources.”
  • Though those numbers certainly seem large — maybe even astoundingly so — on their own, they are part of a years-long effort that began during the Obama administration that has seen many non-military federal agencies arm themselves to the teeth.
  • As the recently released GAO report notes, from FY 2010 to FY 2017, non-military federal agencies spent $1.5 billion on ammunition, weapons and military grade tactical gear. As an example, during that time frame, the VA bought 11 million rounds of ammunition, roughly equivalent to 2,800 rounds for each of its 3,957 officers. Similarly, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has purchased 4 million rounds over the past eight years and acquired 1 million rounds for use by its 461 special agents. The HHS has called its arms purchases “imperative.” In addition, the SSA bought 800,000 rounds for their 270 special agents during this period, amounting to nearly 3,000 rounds per agent. Even the U.S. Postal Service acquired significant amounts of weapons and ammunition.

...

These purchases in the past have been the subject of some controversy, such as the mass purchases of hollow-point rounds by government agencies including the Forest Service, National Park Service, Office of Inspector General, Bureau of Fiscal Service, the Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Marshals, and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Hollow-point bullets are illegal under the Geneva Convention but government agencies spent at least $426,268 in just two years (FY 2015 and FY 2016) to acquire them.

Ammunition purchases by the Department of Homeland Security in 2013 were also controversial and were subsequently investigated by the GAO. DHS had claimed that is was buying over a billion rounds of ammunition, including hollow-point rounds, in order to “save money.” However, this has long been in doubt, given that hollow-point rounds are significantly more expensive than other rounds that do not expand upon impact.

At the time, Forbes noted that the massive ammo purchases by DHS could be used to sustain a “hot war” for more than twenty years, given that during the height of the Iraq War the Army used around 6 million rounds per month. With its planned purchase of 1.6 billion rounds, DHS would have ammo left over after matching the Army’s peak daily outpouring of hot lead for two solid decades.

Though the initial mass purchases of ammo and weapons by U.S. federal agencies received considerable media attention and provided fodder for numerous conspiracy theories, the fact that those purchases have continued under Trump has received surprisingly less attention. This may be because past concerns over such purchases during the Obama era were often raised along partisan lines, with conservatives being the most vocal critics. This may seem odd given the gun control stances of Obama and his supporters. Many of those who had criticized the Obama administration for these shocking purchases, a large number of whom are now Trump supporters, may perhaps be uninclined to levy similar criticism against a president they now support.

In addition, it is not surprising that the Trump administration would allow these purchases to continue given that such purchases greatly benefit American arms manufacturers, with whom the president has cultivated a close relationship while making arms sales to allies the cornerstone of his foreign policy. Thus, it would make sense that Trump would be willing to support U.S. government purchases of those same arms, by both the military — as evidenced by the Pentagon’s still-ballooning budget — and non-military agencies.

There is no denying that these purchases represent a significant amount of government waste. More importantly, these purchases reveal the gradual yet continual effort to militarize federal agencies that have historically been administrative, a trend that should concern all Americans.

While the militarization of domestic police forces has attracted attention, it is equally important to ask why regulatory agencies are now so heavily armed, considering that virtually all of those pursued by these regulatory agencies are American citizens who are wanted for minor infractions or non-violent crimes.

One might ask themselves, what has been the history of the state when it comes to this sort of activity? Consider that it is this government, outside of their delegated authority, that just passed a bill calling for the murder of the innocent up to birth (Proverbs 6:17).

Yet, there are still many Americans that stand back and play the fool to their own demise as to what this is all really about.

 

Bradlee Dean is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions are his own and do not reflect the views and opinions of the Genesis Communication Network. Bradlee's radio program, The Sons of Libertybroadcasts live M - Sat here at GCN. This op-ed was originally published by Sons of Liberty Media at www.sonsoflibertyradio.com. Reprinted with permission. 

 

Published in Opinion

The word has spread all over the internet, and all over the news that as many as 50 people conspired in a scheme to help their kids cheat on SAT/ACT tests and / or get their kid admitted to a privileged school on an athletic scholarship - even if the child had never played the sport.

Okay. Well, that’s clearly fraud. You can’t pay someone to take tests for your kid and you can’t get admitted on scholarship for a sport you’ve never played. That’s a crime. And let’s not forget the general idea that the moment you pay for the privilege of placing your child in a college that he/she probably didn’t deserve to be at - you’ve actually significantly harmed someone else who deserved that place but was rejected due to your fraud.

And there are some high profile people involved in this including actress Felicity Huffman (of Desperate Housewives fame) and actress Lori Loughlin (of Full House fame) both who paid huge sums of money to cheat their kids into college. Now, I know parents will do anything for their kids so, to be honest - I’m certainly not surprised to hear that rich parents will, you know - pay large sums of money to give their children even more privilege and more advantages than they already had. This is not a big shock to me.

And this is nothing new, right? I mean, all you have to do is apply common sense and reason to the George W. Bush Yale/Harvard question. How did Bush Jr. get into either ivy league school with his C average in high school, his decent (but certainly not great) SAT score and his zero college sports scholarships? You or I would NOT be able to get into Yale or Harvard with a C average and a decent SAT score. So how did Bush Jr. get in? Well, we all know that answer to that - because his family is well know and rich, rich, rich.

Obviously both schools accepted Bush Jr.., probably for the prestige of the Bush name but maybe, like in these recent cases - out of fraud. It’s very possible the Bush family just shelled out huge sums of cash to both schools until the universities in question said, “Sure, we’ll take your C student son!”

Well, that’s pretty much what this new scandal is all about. And we’re talking all sorts of universities are involved in this - Georgetown, Stanford, Yale, Wake Forest, UCLA, USC, Harvard, to name a few. And officials are claiming this might be just the tip of the iceberg.

So, how did this all happen?

It appears that a man named William "Rick" Singer is the front runner. Singer is CEO of “The Key,” which is a college admission prep company. And Singer pretty much told super rich parents that, for a specific fee, he would pay people to take standardized tests for their kids and then Singer would bribe test administrators to look the other way. If that wasn’t going to work out, he told parents he could create fake sports photos to submit to the schools and pay coaches to recommend a sports scholarships. He did that too! Well, Singer was caught, and he confessed to everything, so I’m not going to bother with the word - alleged.

And, of course, sometimes the parents helped in communications with university officials or coaches. Sometimes they didn’t. But they all paid and they all knew what they were doing was illegal. And some of the parents paid huge amounts of money - up to millions of dollars! I mean, how much does your kid have suck in school for their parents to need to pay millions of dollars to get them accepted?

Anyway, then Singer used his “The Key” business to launder all the money, and all the parents agreed to the scam from top to bottom. And this is pretty much the epitome of fraud, racketeering and conspiracy. So this is going to get a whole lot of rich people in trouble, all their kids are going to get thrown out of their respective schools and lots of money is going to get lost. The lawyers will all make out like bandits, though (but don’t they always). 

What will happen now?

Well, will anyone go to jail? Ummmm, probably not any of the parents. They’re all rich and have expensive lawyers. They’ll probably pay a fine or two and get a hand-slap or two. And there will certainly be public embarrassment and humiliation. Prosecutors might pin a few things on some low power scapegoats and throw them in jail as, “a lesson,” but that’s probably all that will happen.  

Anyway. I don’t know about you but I am not surprised that super rich people pay ridiculous amount of money to get their kids into a college that they clearly don’t deserve to be in. Is it a crime? Yes. Should their kids be kicked out of school? Yes. Should there be some kind of punishment and/or fine? Yes. Will there be lawsuits? Yes. But, to be honest, the only thing that really shocks me here is that, this time - the rich folks actually have to pay for their crimes. That's actually, pretty surprising. 

Published in Opinion

After two horrific airline crashes within six months many airlines around the world are grounding the Boeing 737 MAX 8, the model of plane used in both crashes. Investigators are still looking into the most recent crash that happened on Sunday to see if it the reason for the crash is related to the previous 737 MAX 8 which crashed just six months prior.  

Boeing is the largest aerospace company in the world and it’s a leading manufacturer of commercial jetliners, defense, space and security systems, and service provider of aftermarket support. It’s also one of America’s biggest (if not THE biggest) manufacturing exporter, as the company supports airlines and U.S. and allied government customers in more than 150 countries.

Boeing leaders should be panicking right now. This is a brand new plane and now it’s responsible for the deaths of several hundred people. I mean, the investigation for the recent Ethiopian crash isn’t complete and it might reveal that the crash was due to pilot error and not as the previous crash, because of a manufacturing error. But, I doubt it. The Indonesian crash six months ago was due to a malfunction with the MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) which is an “automatic feature that detects if the nose of the plane is pitched up too high and pushes it down to prevent the craft from stalling.” The MCAS during the Indonesian flight sensed that the nose of the plane was too high (even though, it wasn’t) and forced the plane down, sending it into an irreversible nose dive that killed everyone on board. The recent Ethiopian crash on Sunday has all the same signs of the Indonesian disaster.

Many world airlines are not waiting for the recent investigation to conclude and have grounded the Boeing MAX 8. This is the right move! Sadly, some airlines are ignoring the threat and are keeping that model in flight rotation. This is clearly a risk/profit analysis, right? They are choosing to risk the death’s of their passengers because they are concerned grounding the plane might cut into their profits and they certainly don’t want to admit any guilt because that will only add fuel to all those future lawsuits that are coming.

Enter Senator John Thune (R) who is ranking member on aviation oversight of the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration). Thune told reporters that he would be open to grounding the planes if the evidence pointed to it, but absolutely did NOT say that the Boeing MAX 8 should be grounded out of precaution. That is, of course, until a reported asked this question:

Reporter: Would you feel safe flying in a Super Max 8 right now? Would you fly on it?

Thune: Uhhh...well, I guess I would uh, probably like everybody else, prefer flying on some other plane.

Isn’t that just like a spineless politician? He won’t go against his corporate masters but he certainly wouldn’t fly on that plane! He can’t even come out and say it out loud. He has to stammer and stutter his way into a “prefer” comment.

Obviously, the Boeing 737 Super Max 8 should be grounded. And Thune knows it. I mean he certainly won’t risk his life, or the lives of his family but - you? He’s fine with that. I hope his constituents vote him the F out of office come next election day.

As of Tuesday here are the airlines that are still flying the Boeing 737 Super Max 8:

American Airlines

Southwest Airlines

Norwegian Airlines

TUI

Fiji Airways

Icelandair

Flydubai

WestJet

GOL Linhas Aéreas

 

Update 3/13/19 - 3:00pm: Most countries have grounded the Boeing 737 Super Max 8. Boeing did NOT ground the planes themselves because they care more about $$ than human lives. Finally, just a few minutes ago - President Trump issued an Executive Order grounding all 737 Super Max 8 models in the U.S.

Update 3/21/19 - 1:10pm: The investigation has concluded that both planes went down for the exact same reason - a faulty MCAS! From my understanding, all Super Max 8 models are now grounded.  

 

This is an updating story. 

Published in World

Okay. As a huge Michael Jackson fan I did not want to watch Leaving Neverland, the HBO documentary detailing MJ during the height of his stardom and his relationship with two boys, aged 7 and 10 (now in their 30s), and their story of how MJ sexually abused them. I mean, I was always on the fence with MJ's guilt. I’m sure that over the years, I defended him in conversations, even though I had my doubt.

I grew up in the 80’s and MJ was THE super star of my generation. Everyone loved him. I mean, don’t get me wrong, there was always a kid or two that was like, “I hate Michael Jackson” but, whatever. No they didn't.  

In fact, one of the hardest decisions my 9 year old self ever had to make was this: It was Friday night and there were two things on TV at the same time that I desperately needed to watch.

The first: Doctor Who: The Key to Time Part (something)  Dude, you may not care about Doctor Who but for me, as a nine year old kid - Doctor Who was the everything!  I can’t remember exactly which episode of Key to Time was going to be on, but I know that it aired at 10pm and went until midnight. On Friday.

The second: Friday Night Videos. Which, from memory was on from 10:30 to 11:30pm. And, you know what video was going to be the featured? Thriller! For the first time, ever!

OMG! What to watch. What to do? What to watch! Doctor Who or Thriller?  Thriller or Doctor Who?

I watched Doctor Who. Which, come Monday morning at school, turned out to be huge mistake because everyone else had seen Thriller and I was suddenly the uncool kid, and the only kid in class - who had not seen it. Which, is a big deal when you’re nine.

Moving forward, personally, I think Bad is actually a more consistent album than Thriller, and Smooth Criminal is the greatest dance video ever produced and probably my favorite MJ song. I bought MJ’s early 90s album, Dangerous, but by then the magic was fading. I never bought HIStory and never even heard much of his music after that because by then we were neck deep in “Wacko Jacko” stories and abuse allegation trials. And, even if their wasn’t actual abuse, which is what I believed at the time - Jackson was f**king weird, man! He did himself no favors by … ummm … admitting to sleeping in the same bed with lots of children. For many years. At his private ranch. While the parents of the kids where at a completely separate part of the ranch. And MJ had alarms on his doors & hallways so no one would be able to sneak up on his bedroom unnoticed - where he was alone with the children. In bed. But, um, nothing happened (says Jackson.)

And a lot of us … kind of believed it. I mean, the idea that MJ, who’s public persona was nothing more than a grown up kid himself, actually molested children was difficult to believe. But now, in 2019, the very thought that I didn’t believe the allegations against him feels pretty damn naïve. But at the time, I mean, he was weird and he was rich - which makes him an easy target. And just because he’s weird and rich doesn’t mean he’s evil. And besides, I like his music and his dancing is awesome. Therefore - he probably isn’t guilty. Right? (And "probably" was good enough for me.) 

Shortly after his death (in 2009), I read about a couple of the police officers that had collected evidence in the 90's Jackson child abuse allegations. And while they were under a gag order and were unable to discuss specifics, both of the officers said something that struck me, which was to the effect of, “I make sure no one, and I mean no one in my house, or family - listens to Michael Jackson. Ever.”

Hmmm. Reading between the lines there, it sounds as if the officers involved in collecting evidence from Neverland Ranch were so disturbed by said collected evidence against M.J. - that they refused to let anyone in their family ever listen to his music.

To me, that suggested - something. Not everything, yet ...  but something. But still, at the time, had you asked me if I was 100% certain of MJs guilt I probably would have made excuses defending him, but then at the end of the conversation would have said, “But I don’t know, I wasn’t there. So … maybe he’s guilty.”

Back to the fact that I really didn’t want to watch Leaving Neverland. You know why? Because it’s pretty damn clear I always suspected in my heart that my childhood idol was guilty of pedophilia and I just didn’t want to hear proof. Which is a sad admission, but there it is. Also, I suspect many, many people feel/felt this way.

And so, I watched it.

Holy God. The documentary is as horrifying as you’ve heard. Part 1 details the allegations, which are stunning. Part 2 deals with family trauma, which is heartbreaking. And it's true that the documentary doesn’t offer “proof,” per say (for example - video of the abuse), it does; however, offer two extremely believable, sincere testimonials from James Safechuck and Wade Robson, both of whom accused MJ of sexually molesting them for many years when they were young, Wade as early as seven years old. Seven years old! And the documentary does not make any case that MJ doesn’t know what he is doing. In fact, it suggests the exact opposite in that MJ is a totally self aware f**king monster. The grooming. The planning. The lying. The seducing. The gifts. Getting the kids to lie for you. Just about everything we know about child molesters is there and it was probably always there, and most of us ignored it - because Michael Jackson is awesome!   

Corey Feldman and Macaulay Culkin, MJ's two famous childhood actor friends, have both repeatedly said that MJ never did anything inappropriate to them which, I actually beleive because they were both famous child actors at the time. Pedophiles target kids with no power. Feldman and Culkin had, at least a modicum amount of power which is probably why MJ didn't target them. Culkin, as far as I am aware, has yet to comment on the documentary, but Feldman pushed back calling it “one sided” and criticized the film because MJ has no chance to defend himself.  But, that's not exactly true, is it? I mean, MJ had every chance to defend himself when he was alive and in fact, he did so because there were acusations and trials. It occurred to me that we’ve only heard MJ’s side of the story - over and over and over - that he's innocent, he would never hurt kids, the alleged "victims" were out for money and that the media lied about him because he's rich and weird. That's the story we've been told. Leaving Neverland is actually, the first time we’ve ever heard from any of the alleged victims. So, I kind of feel like, while it's true we don't have "proof" that MJ is guilty or innocent - we've heard his side of things - that he's an altruistic angel and does nothing wrong and is the target of a smear campaign. And now we've finally heard from two of the alleged victims. And they are very, very compelling. 

Feldman, himself an alleged victim of sexual abuse, quickly backtracked his early defense of MJ, telling CNN:

“I cannot in good consciousness defend anyone who’s being accused of such horrendous crimes, but at the same time, I’m also not here to judge him, because, again, he didn’t do those things to me and that was not my experience …  It comes to a point where, as an advocate for victims, as an advocate for changing the statutes of limitations to make sure that victims’ voices are heard, it becomes impossible for me to stay virtuous and not at least consider what’s being said and not listen to what the victims are saying … As I’m watching it [the Leaving Neverland documentary], I’m going, ‘This doesn’t make sense to me. This isn’t the guy that I knew. But look, I’m a guy that at 14 years old was molested, did have a pedophile completely lie to me about who he was. I trusted him. I believed in him as a friend, and I thought he was a good person, and then he molested me. It all proves that I’m not the best judge, and that’s why I shouldn’t be the judge in this situation, and especially given the fact that I’m so close to [Jackson].”

Jackson still has his defenders. He always will. I used to be one of them. Not so much any longer. I mean, MJ was weird and rich and was an easy target and his estate is worth … God only knows … a couple of billion dollars? That, right there, is motive. So, I feel that I really understand all the reasons people don’t want to believe that, Michael Jackson, the best selling recording artist of all time - is a pedophile. I really do understand the reasons for doubt, but - I no longer believe any of them.

Not one bit.

Published in Opinion
%PM, %07 %939 %2019 %21:%Mar

Medicare for all: Reality or fantasy?

Senator Bernie Sanders during the 2016 Presidential Election called for a single payer system to cure our healthcare woes. Now Democratic contenders for the 2020 election are calling for the same. Some voters are salivating at the thought, tired of high insurance premiums and deductibles. Others are cringing at the idea of the government running our healthcare system. Yet most are confused and want more details. So let’s break it down.

What is Medicare?

Medicare is the health insurance offered by the federal government for those over 65 and with disabilities. According to medicare.gov they breakdown medicare as the following:

Medicare is the federal health insurance program for:

  • People who are 65 or older

  • Certain younger people with disabilities

  • People with End-Stage Renal Disease (permanent kidney failure requiring dialysis or a transplant, sometimes called ESRD)

The different parts of Medicare help cover specific services:

Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance)

Part A covers inpatient hospital stays, care in a skilled nursing facility, hospice care, and some home health care.

Medicare Part B (Medical Insurance)  

Part B covers certain doctors’ services, outpatient care, medical supplies, and preventive services.

Medicare Part D (prescription drug coverage)

Part D adds prescription drug coverage to:

  • Original Medicare
  • Some Medicare Cost Plans
  • Some Medicare Private-Fee-for-Service Plans
  • Medicare Medical Savings Account Plans

These plans are offered by insurance companies and other private companies approved by Medicare. Medicare Advantage Plans may also offer prescription drug coverage that follows the same rules as Medicare Prescription Drug Plans

Medicare Advantage (also known as Part C) is an “all in one” alternative to Original Medicare. These “bundled” plans include Part A, Part B, and usually Part D.

What is Medicare For All?

Originally suggested by Senator Bernie Sanders, Medicare for All would essentially allow all Americans to qualify for Medicare. According to Unitedmedicareadvisors.com:

Medicare for All promises to cover numerous healthcare products and services, including the following:

  • Inpatient and outpatient health care services

  • Preventative, emergency, and nonemergency health care services and treatments

  • Primary and specialty healthcare, including palliative and long-term care

  • Care for vision, hearing, and oral health problems

  • Mental health and addiction services

  • Prescription medication

  • Medical equipment and supplies

  • Diagnostic tests

The concept sounds nice but Medicare doesn’t currently cover many of the above such as hearing aids, dental exams, and long-term care.

How would Medicare For All be subsidized?

Unitedmedicareadvisors.com reports the following:

MEDICARE FOR ALL, ESTIMATED TO COST AROUND $1.38 TRILLION A YEAR, WOULD OPERATE WITH FUNDING FROM THE FOLLOWING SOURCES:
  • $630 BILLION FROM A 6.2 PERCENT INCOME-BASED PREMIUM PAID BY EMPLOYERS
  • $210 BILLION FROM A 2.2 PERCENT INCOME-BASED PREMIUM PAID BY HOUSEHOLDS MAKING MORE THAN $28,800
  • $110 BILLION FROM PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAX RATES FOR AMERICANS WITH YEARLY EARNINGS OVER $250,000
  • $92 BILLION FROM TAXING CAPITAL GAINS AND DIVIDENDS IN LINE WITH EMPLOYMENT INCOME
  • $15 BILLION FROM LIMITING TAX DEDUCTION FOR AMERICANS WITH YEARLY EARNINGS OVER $250,000
  • $21 BILLION FROM A NEW RESPONSIBLE ESTATE TAX APPLIED TO THE HOMES OF AMERICANS INHERITING MORE THAN $3.5 MILLION
  • $310 BILLION FROM SAVINGS AS HEALTH-RELATED TAX EXPENSES BECOME OBSOLETE

Unfortunately, tax hikes on employers could lead to price hikes and less employment.

So the concerns I have are Medicare doesn’t currently cover what Medicare for All is touting and the expense may be underprojected.

Moreover many healthcare providers do NOT take Medicare so access can be an issue.

However, until premiums and deductibles go down, and more Americans become insured, plans such as this will gain attention and popularity.

 

---- 

Daliah Wachs is a guest contributor to GCN news, her views and opinions, medical or otherwise, if expressed, are her own. Doctor Wachs is an MD,  FAAFP and a Board Certified Family Physician.  The Dr. Daliah Show , is nationally syndicated M-F from 11:00 am - 2:00 pm and Saturday from Noon-1:00 pm (all central times) at GCN.

Published in Health
%PM, %02 %869 %2019 %19:%Mar

Exposing false Christians

“Some men have a very small Savior, for they are not willing to receive Him fully, and let Him do great and mighty things for them.” -D. L. Moody

It was J. C. Ryle that said:

“Look at the history of the church of Christ after the days of the apostles. How soon formalism ate out the life and vitality of the primitive Christians. Look at the Middle Ages, as they are called. Formalism so covered the face of Christendom that the Gospel laid there as one does when they are dead. Look, lastly, at the history of the protestant churches in the last three centuries. How few are the places where religion is a living thing! How many are the countries where Protestantism is nothing more than form! There is no getting past these things.”

I am here addressing the formal believers who deny "the gospel,” which was preached “unto you” by “the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven" (1 Peter 1:12).

These deny the giftings of the Holy Ghost.

“Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.  But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.” -1 Corinthians 12:4-12

These formal believers would have you rest Scripture in having you believe them in that which counters the Word of God in their feigned and dissimulated state (Romans 12:9), rather than in God and His Word, which is immutable and infallible.

“For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power.” -1 Corinthians 4:20

These formal believers that just do not believe, would suggest to you that what the Lord has done in the past is now a work from the past. The Word of God in all of its promises is now nothing but a memory of better days! That in some way He was willing to do in the Old and New Testament what He is now unwilling to do today. This all coming to you from formal believers in Christ that just do not believe!

Remember,

“Those that teach that the day of miracles is past, teach the most disastrous lie ever told… Such lies are responsible for the prevalent lack of faith in God and have robbed Christianity of the power to demonstrate itself.” -John G. Lake

Formalist:  One who regards appearances only, or observes the forms of worship, without possessing the life and spirit of religion; a hypocrite. -Webster’s 1828 Dictionary

A formalist is one who plays the part and claims to have the answers that the world has great need of, and yet they are found to be false witnesses.

“And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.” -1 Corinthians 14:14-17

What would you think if I brought a freezing man a painting of a fire which cannot bring him any warmth? You would say that was cruel, and I would agree. What would you think if I brought a painting of a large banquet dinner to a starving man? Again, you would say that that is cruel, and again, I would agree wholeheartedly. Is that not what those who claim to be Christians do when they begin to denounce and counter the Word of God in all of its promises?

“For all the promises of God in Him are Yes, and in Him Amen, to the glory of God through us.” -2 Corinthians 1:20

You see formal believers that just do not believe seem to promise much, but deliver nothing but feeble paintings. The reason being is that these formal believers cannot deliver what they do not have.

Jesus tells us to “Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.” Matthew 10:8

Many of those who call themselves believers in Jesus Christ are found to be more like unbelievers.  They have the shell and the form only.  They have the head, but not the heart when it comes to what Jesus said that He would bestow upon those who do believe.

As a matter of fact, these formal believers that just do not believe like to set themselves next to Jesus claiming to be His, and then go on to deny to the world what Jesus promised to do for them.

“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” -Matthew 23:15

These formal believers that just do not believe omit the obvious when it comes to what is right in front of their faces

“And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.” -Mark 16:20

Apparently, these do not understand,

“The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits.” -2 Timothy 2:6

These Pharisaical hypocrites, dead in the formality of their sins, profess their Christianity in word only as if they were just like Jesus, all the while denying Him.

“He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore, greatly err.” -Mark 12:27

For many of these said formal believers that just do not believe, they are more likely to denounce the Word of God in favor of their false professions and lack of spiritual life by blaming the Holy Ghost for not bearing witness to their lies.

Again, they are more like unbelievers than they are believers.  They are more like anti-Christs who are, in fact, succumbers to this world, the flesh and the devil (1 John 2:15-18) in giving defeat a praise report than victory in Christ.

“He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.” -1 John 5:12

Maybe these formal believers that just do not believe have forgotten that Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8).

“For I am the LORD, I change not;” -Malachi 3:6

They have forgotten that He is faithful to a thousand generations.

“Know therefore that the Lord thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations.” -Deuteronomy 7:9

It is not the Lord that has changed, it is man that has disobeyed and played the hypocrite by having one foot in the world and one foot in the Church (2 Corinthians 6:17; James 1:7-9, 4:4).

“The church will have a convincing testimony and will become a power in the world when it is separated from the world; but as long as it is hand in glove with the world, it cannot have power.” -D. L. Moody

These formal believers that just do not believe fail to deny themselves (Galatians 2:20) and take up their cross.  Instead, they deny Christ (Matthew 10:33) and give heed to the commandments of man, which nullify the commandments of God (Mark 7:13) and union with the Father (1 John 2:23).

By keeping our eyes fixed on the Author and Finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2), we receive the end of our faith (1 Peter 1:9).

“That ye be not slothful, but followers (Imitators) of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.” -Hebrews 6:12

These formal believers that just do not believe attempt to bring the rest of the world to their own level of unbelief, as if to suggest that they are the standard!  (Abandoned to their sins - 1 John 3:4).

“Disregard them! They are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” -Matthew 15:14

Scripture tells us:

“For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake." -1 Thessalonians 1:5

Yet, the formal believers, who have a “form of godliness,” are well enough to leave off and deny the very Christ that bought them (Acts 20:28).  Scripture tells us to turn away from them.

“Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.” -2 Timothy 3:5

 

 

Bradlee Dean is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions are his own and do not reflect the views and opinions of the Genesis Communication Network. Bradlee's radio program, The Sons of Libertybroadcasts live M - Sat here at GCN. This op-ed was originally published by Sons of Liberty Media at www.sonsoflibertyradio.com. Reprinted with permission. 

The good news is God will not deny Himself!

“If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.” -2 Timothy 2:13

Published in Opinion

As we turn the bend during the second semester of the school year we begin to face challenges. For many of us the material seems insurmountable….maybe we perceive it as such, or maybe teachers realize they are falling short and rush to get all the information in before the school year ends.

Either way, students feel stressed, overwhelmed and many times unable to catch up. So what do you do when you find the material to be TMTH (too much to handle)?

You don’t have to learn EVERYTHING

Firstly, realize that you don’t have to learn everything. Remember, the professor can’t test on EVERYTHING. So don’t go at a packet, slide deck or book with the attitude that you have to know everything.  Find the Titles, the main point in the paragraph that follows, and any supporting info that seems to buttress the main point. Careful with your use of highlighting if you’re tired and burning out because you’ll start to highlight everything.  Which brings us to….

Have a study buddy

Two heads are better than one. Sometimes three…but more than that may be distracting. What you thought was important in class or on a sheet of information can be confirmed or denied by another student.  Moreover everyone has strengths and weaknesses so find one who can compliment you and help you discern what’s important to know.

Be direct…ask the teacher

Rather than guessing, take 15 minutes to meet with the teacher to get an idea of what they find imperative to learn/know for the test. But don’t go into their office asking “will this be on the test?” I would be direct, honest, but humble by asking:

  • “All the information you gave us is very important. What do you suggest we concentrate on?”
  • “I find myself wanting to memorize all the information you gave us due to its importance, but is there a better strategy?”
  • “I want to do well on the exam and not over-concentrate on the part of the material that will not be tested as it could take time away from my learning the other material that you want us to know.”
  • “I would really appreciate any advice you can give on how to approach the material being tested.  I enjoy your class and want to accurately demonstrate the effort I’m putting in to succeed in your course.”

Now, many times the professor will oblige.  But if not, you need to indirectly determine what he/she is going to test. This brings us to…..

Watch for the “Brush Over”

How was the material given?

If your professor brushed over it quickly in class, it could mean they don’t find it crucial enough to test or ….they don’t completely understand the material themselves. Most likely this will not be tested.  However, if he/she brushed over it because it was given in a previous lecture, then its open game.

Demonstrations of the brush over include:

  • Skipping over to the next slide
  • Skipping over to the next sentence
  • Speaking quickly and less slow with regards to a certain subject matter
  • Speaking vaguely over the subject matter
  • Looking down and away when discussing the subject matter when he/she usually gives direct eye contact during lectures
  • Moving the laser pointer to an earlier point as he/she reinforces it.

Know your professor

Are they big on testing if you paid attention in class or knowing the information that’s necessary to succeed? Are they a jerk and will pick the most esoteric piece of content from a 1000 word slide or will they focus on main points? Get an idea on what makes them tick.

A test is a game

For some institutions the exam is to test competency. These are the most clear-cut, fair tests and to me, make the most sense. If, for example, in medical school one is studying poor lung function and what a spirometer discerns, the inventor and history of the tool will most likely not be tested.  Keep in mind, your professor has bosses and they have bosses, so your competency reflects on them.

For other institutions it may be at the professor’s discretion.  So you need to feel out each teacher and see what they’re all about. If they are big on class attendance and will weight the test towards those who showed up, expect questions on content that was highlighted in class. And if they are big on seeing if you paid attention, you will be tested on something they impressed upon you sometime during lecture. So during the lecture watch for the following:

  • Long pause after finishing a point on a slide
  • Eye contact when delivering the content
  • Reiterating a point twice
  • The key word the professor stresses with his laser pointer

So after you’ve done your “homework,” how do you tackle your studies?

Map out your strategy

Your time is divisible so grab a calculator and aliquot into equal periods. Make sure you have extra sessions included for breaks and catch up sessions. Or you can use a calendar that is already compartmentalized on which to create your timetable.

Clean your desk!

A nice clean, crisp desk with plenty of pens and highlighters helps energize one more than cluttered paper. Moreover have a second work space you can go to when you get sick of working at your desk.

Prioritize

Now this is easier said than done. Some will put their hardest classes on their study calendar first, some the easiest. There are pros and cons to both. What I suggest is alternating difficult and easy subjects. You need the start of your day and initial power hours knocking out the difficult material, but then the easier classes will boost your confidence and sometimes energy.  So one option could be:

  • Study block 1:  Tough subject
  • Study block 2:  Easy subject
  • Study block 3:  Medium subject
  • Hour 4:  Review
  • With breaks, of course, in between.

Take real breaks!

You should design two types of breaks: Short and Long.

Your short break should be no shorter than 10 minutes. During the break you must do the following:

  • Get up and stretch
  • Drink water
  • Eat a small snack
  • Go to the bathroom
  • Listen to some music, dance, phone a friend

Your long break should be no shorter than 45 minutes. During these breaks you can:

  • Eat a regular meal, if due, and drink plenty of fluids
  • Take a small nap
  • Take a shower – helps refresh and energize
  • Check social media – stick to your time limit though!
  • Watch a 30 minute episode of your favorite sitcom
  • Exercise such as going for a run

Identify signs of burnout

If you’re “going through the motions” of studying and feel “burnt” you won’t be absorbing the material and subsequently you’ll be wasting precious hours. You must identify burnout by looking for the following:

  • Apathy
  • Exhaustion
  • Poor sleep when you get done in the evening
  • Negative attitude towards school and others
  • Procrastinating your next study block
  • Being irritated
  • Feeling empty
  • Low energy
  • Thinking about quitting

How to avoid burnout

When studying you’re classwork it’s difficult to avoid the boredom and stress, but the following may help:

  • Study with friends
  • Mix up your study sessions with videos and flash cards if reading gets overwhelming
  • Watch a short funny video to get you laughing
  • Take regular breaks
  • Make sure you’re eating and sleeping well

Remember, we’ve all been there and school is supposed to be challenging. Stay on course and get help if you need such as a tutor.  We all make it to the finish line….even if we’re a little bruised up when we get there.

 

---- 

Daliah Wachs is a guest contributor to GCN news, her views and opinions, medical or otherwise, if expressed, are her own. Doctor Wachs is an MD,  FAAFP and a Board Certified Family Physician.  The Dr. Daliah Show , is nationally syndicated M-F from 11:00 am - 2:00 pm and Saturday from Noon-1:00 pm (all central times) at GCN.

Published in Opinion

Americans have been so “Hollywoodized” that they think that the devil is going to come to them with a rack of horns on his head and a pitchfork in hand to steal, kill and destroy (John 10:10). Scripture teaches us the opposite.

Those that were approved of the Lord, those who were warning the people to flee from the wrath to come, and those who were proclaiming God’s truth were carpenters, fisherman, tax collectors, foolish (1 Corinthians 1:27), and unlearned men (Acts 4:13), weak, as well as men dressed in the attire of camel’s hair, leather belts, eating locusts and wild honey (Matthew 3:7).

In contrast, those that were highly esteemed (Luke 16:15) and approved of among men (Are you listening, America?), Jesus was damning

“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.” -Matthew 23:27

“Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.” -Luke 11:52

And I ask, how many in the American Church and American politics fit the physical and mental characteristics of those whom God was damning?

Yet, Jesus charged them saying, “Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod” (Mark 8:15).

Jesus also said, “Verily I say unto you, that the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you” (Matthew 21:31).

And as I was writing out this Holy Ghost download (Matthew 16:18; Acts 2:36) that I was receiving, I immediately began to realize that this is happening because people that profess to be Christians do not even know the Scriptures (John 7:17), which, in fact, is a lack of Christianity (1 John 2:4). They think that because someone claims to be a Christian, then it must be so. Remember, no one rebuked the religious hypocrites more than Jesus (Matthew 23).

Eighty-six percent of Americans call themselves Christians, and 78% of those who are representatives in government capacity call themselves Christians. No wonder why America is falling to the curses (Deuteronomy 28:15-68).  These professed Christians are following and honoring men in office rather than honoring the Christ they claim to serve (Matthew 15:8)!

“Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.” -Jeremiah 17:5

These hypocrites have exchanged the King that has bought them with His own blood (1 Corinthians 6:20; 1 John 2:2) for a  fallen and reprobate man that sells them out (Luke 22:48).

Instead of man submitting to the Lawgiver, they slavishly serve the lawbreakers (Isaiah 14:12-15).

Instead of them serving out of love the One that cannot and will not lie (Numbers 23:19), they submit to those who lie on a daily basis.

Instead of man submitting to the immutable God (Hebrews 6:18), they submit to fallen man and every wind of his made up doctrine, the sleight of men and their cunning craftiness as they continuously deceive.

“That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;” -Ephesians 4:14

On the other hand...

“Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD (And magnifies His government), and whose hope the LORD is.” -Jeremiah 17:7

Friends, no matter who the president is (Romans 13:3-4) remember, he has no title of nobility (Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8, US Constitution).

Jesus will always be the King (Isaiah 9:6).

Another way of saying this is either Jesus is your King, or your man made king will be your god (Exodus 20:3).

On April 18, 1775, John Adams and John Hancock were at the home of Rev. Jonas Clarke, a Lexington pastor and militia leader. That same night Paul Revere arrived to warn them of the approaching Redcoats. The next morning, British Major Pitcairn shouted to an assembled regiment of Minutemen:  "Disperse, ye villains, lay down your arms in the name of George the Sovereign King of England."

The immediate response of Rev. Jonas Clarke or one of his company was:

"We recognize no Sovereign but God and no King but Jesus."

 

Bradlee Dean is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions are his own and do not reflect the views and opinions of the Genesis Communication Network. Bradlee's radio program, The Sons of Libertybroadcasts live M - Sat here at GCN. This op-ed was originally published by Sons of Liberty Media at www.sonsoflibertyradio.com. Reprinted with permission. 

Published in Opinion

First of all, I’m not a fan of the Tucker Carlson Show; however, because of my job, I have to watch it on occasion. His show is typical conservative talking points without much depth and a whole lot of disingenuous propaganda. That being said, in the past few days I’ve read much about Carlson’s “meltdown” during his pre-recorded unaired interview with Dutch Historian Rutger Bregman. Imagine my disappointment when I found out the meltdown wasn’t much more than Carlson calling his guest a “moron” and telling him to go “f**k himself.”Before I spout my two cents, let me give you some context on just who the guest in question, Rutger Bregman, is.  

According to wikipedia:

“Rutger C. Bregman (born 1988) is a Dutch historian and author. He has published four books on history, philosophy and economics, including Utopia for Realists: How We Can Build the Ideal World, which has been translated into twenty languages. The Dutch edition of Utopia for Realists" became a national bestseller and sparked a basic income movement that soon made international headlines." His work has been featured in The Washington Post, The Guardian and the BBC. He has been described by The Guardian as the "Dutch wunderkind of new ideas” and by TED Talks as "one of Europe's most prominent young thinkers." His TED Talk, "Poverty Isn't a Lack of Character; It's a Lack of Cash," was chosen by TED curator Chris Anderson as one of the top ten of 2017.”

Okay, fair enough. He seems to be well educated and knows his stuff. But he, very recently, shot to viral fame when, in January he attended Davos and … well, told them off.

 

So … what exactly is Davos (besides being a town in the Swiss Alps)?

 

Well, basically Davos is the common name for a yearly gathering of an international organization called the World Economic Forum. Thousands of business, political and charity figures attend the week long event. It can, though does not always, lead to significant consequences for global affairs.

So, Bregman goes to Davos and basically says,

“This is my first time at Davos, and I find it quite a bewildering experience to be honest.

I mean 1,500 private jets have flown in here to hear Sir David Attenborough speak about, you know, how we're wrecking the planet. And, I mean, I hear people talking the language or participation and justice and equality and transparency, but then, I mean, almost no one raises the real issue of tax avoidance right? And of the rich just not paying their fair share. I mean, it feels like I'm at a firefighters conference and no one's allowed to speak about water, right?” 

Damn! I mean, he’s not wrong because as we all know, hypocrisy knows no bounds. Especially in the day and age where Netflix and Amazon pay zero $$ in taxes. I mean, two  gazillion dollar corporations pay - zero dollars in taxes. That is sickening.  

Anyway. Bregman’s full speech can be found here, he’s actually the first speaker so you won’t have to wait long. Okay, so now you’re all caught up.

 

What about the Tucker Carlson meltdown?

 

So, after the Davos speech in Jan, Carlson invites Bregman to pre-record an interview for the Tucker Carlson show to be aired at a later date. Bregman agrees. The interview happens. 

And the interview starts out benign enough, you know? I mean, Carlson seems genuinely happy to have Bregman on the show and gushes about the shellacking the Bregman gave the rich folks at Davos. It’s quite clear that Carlson is happy to have Bregman on the show - to talk about tax avoidance. 

Things go south quickly. Carlson wants Bregman to keep talking about tax evasion but Bregman clearly had no intention of letting Carlson lead the conversation. So Bregman just rolls over Carlson and says, “raise taxes on the rich” and to Carlson directly, “you’re a millionaire funded by billionaires, that’s what you are!” 

This all may be true but Carlson gets flustered and angry that Bregman keeps pushing the “raise taxes on the rich.” As you may or may not know, Carlson is rich. And it is NOT a Fox talking point to say, “raise taxes on the rich.” Which, to be honest, I think is kind of odd. I mean, the vast majority of Fox viewers are not rich. Far from it. You would think they would be fine with the idea of raising taxes on the rich. But, I guess not. I guess Bregman is correct when he points out to Carlson that he’s part of the problem, not the solution. The interview was never aired but Bregman had a feeling that would happen and so he had some folk record the video feed (on their end) which is how it made the light of day. 

Anyway, Carlson gets angry and finally calls Bregman a moron and tells him to “f**k off,” which, as far as I am concerned is nothing to write home about. I mean, he said, the “f” word? Why is this considered a melt down?  

If you watch the entire “meltdown” video it is true that Carlson becomes so flustered that he just can’t think of how to respond and so reverts to juvenile taunts like, “tiny brain” and “moron.” This might be proof that Carlson is not really the intellectual giant he believes himself to be, but I would hardly call it a meltdown.

Anyway. Tucker Carlson got his ass handed to him by the same guy who stood up in front of  a bunch of rich folks at Devos and … handed them their asses. Should anyone be surprised? 

 I guess, I wasn’t. It still wasn’t a meltdown, though.

Published in Opinion
Page 4 of 16